Search for: "State v. Long"
Results 6221 - 6240
of 45,739
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Apr 2023, 11:17 am
Caperton v. [read post]
19 Sep 2023, 5:01 am
In Hansen v. [read post]
24 Dec 2011, 10:35 am
The fact-finding hearing in The Queen (KN) v LB Barnet [2011] EWHC 2019 (Admin) was heard as long ago as July 2011 but it is worth underlining here as an example of the way the Administrative Court deals with age assessments in the light of the guidance given by the Supreme Court in A v Croydon. [read post]
24 Dec 2011, 10:35 am
The fact-finding hearing in The Queen (KN) v LB Barnet [2011] EWHC 2019 (Admin) was heard as long ago as July 2011 but it is worth underlining here as an example of the way the Administrative Court deals with age assessments in the light of the guidance given by the Supreme Court in A v Croydon. [read post]
17 Oct 2012, 10:30 pm
S.M.K. v. [read post]
1 Sep 2021, 9:01 pm
Ever since Roe v. [read post]
29 Mar 2007, 5:12 am
ITC Ltd. v. [read post]
31 Jan 2025, 3:15 am
The 1985 Pennzoil v. [read post]
28 Dec 2008, 3:41 pm
Long, which requires the decision to be based expressly on state law alone. [read post]
4 Mar 2021, 5:22 pm
., POET, LLC v. [read post]
23 Jul 2007, 8:34 am
A long series of litigation commenced. [read post]
5 May 2023, 1:48 pm
This foolish disparity should not go unnoticed, nor (in the long run) uncorrected. [read post]
25 Feb 2022, 11:51 pm
Tucker has litigated many cases concerning the rights of patients with terminal illness, including Glucksberg v WA, Quill v NY, Baxter v Montana, Bergman v Eden Medical Center, Hargett v Vitas, AIMS et al v DEA.Plaintiffs are also represented by leading disability rights litigator Cat Cabalo and civil rights litigator Adam Wolf of Peiffer Wolf. [read post]
13 Dec 2023, 6:00 am
* Further, in Matter of Froehlich v New York State Dept. of Corr. [read post]
13 Dec 2023, 6:00 am
* Further, in Matter of Froehlich v New York State Dept. of Corr. [read post]
21 Mar 2007, 6:14 am
KinderStart's state unfair competition claims suffered similar fates. [read post]
1 May 2012, 8:00 am
After they realized you were going to fight, they stretched it out as long as possible. [read post]
30 Jun 2020, 10:54 am
This position, which the dissenters agreed with, means that even the most patently pretextual assertion that a state was attempting to protect a woman’s health by restricting access to abortion would be constitutional as long as the restriction itself did not place a substantial obstacle in the face of a woman’s ability to obtain an abortion. [read post]
30 Jul 2012, 12:00 am
The decision of the Supreme Court is by no means the end of this long-running saga, which has already seen two separate references to the CJEU. [read post]
25 Apr 2022, 9:01 pm
The Court seemed to hold that in 1962, when it ruled in Engel v. [read post]
